It’s never easy to brainstorm about pesantren in the debate of national movement in Indonesia; Since most of the discussions, analyzes, and reports on the two monumental milestones of the national movement, namely the first Boedi Oetomo Congress in 1908 and the second Pemoeda Congress in 1928, did not mention the role of Pesantren in it widely. Especially at the 2nd Pemoeda Congress, Jong Java, Jong Sumatranen Bond, Jong Islamieten Bond, Sekar Roekoen, Jong Batak, Jong Theosofen Bond, Ambonsche Strudeerenden, Minahasa Strudeerenden, Studieclub Indonesia, Boedi Oetomo, and Muhammadiyah were indeed named as official participants. However, pesantren and Nahdlatul Ulama as official institutions are not registered at all. The involvement of the youth of Wahab Hasbullah, Hasyim Asy’ari, and Wahid Hasyim in the event was recognized as Individuals and not to represent Pesantren neither Nahdlatul Ulama.
Two Entry points
To start a discussion about this, we can use two entry points. First, the exciting debate between Takdir Alisjahbana and Dr Sutomo about the type of society and the desired new Indonesian human character in the future (Achadiat, K. Mihardja, Cultural Polemics). The debate, which is widely known as the cultural polemic that has emerged since the 1930s. Sutomo, during the discussion on the ideological basis of the national movement, is being critical of Islamic ideology, not only shows enthusiasm for pesantren but is also persistent in defending and campaigning for defence during an onslaught of opponents. His polemic opponents like Takdir Alisjahbana. Luckily, because Sutomo received support from Sanusi Pane and Ki Hadjar Dewantara, the latter even tried to adopt the pesantren education system in Taman Siswa. Second, as made by historians, the historical painting of the pesantren for half a century (1900-1950) shows its strongest tendency to engage in a guerrilla war against Dutch colonialism. The description of the pesantren at the time described this educational institution as “ceasing its intellectual activity and moving into the forest to become a guerrilla war troop against the Dutch”.
But why was Sutomo so passionate about defending the pesantren education system, which at that time was famous for being traditional, ancient, and “village”? It is precisely because of its traditionality and antiquity that pesantren can fulfil the most basic needs of the current and future national formation process. With the choice of location in rural areas and the outskirts of industrial regions, pesantren not only stay away from the centre of political power but also avoid the penetration of outside forces, such as colonial politics and capitalism, which can lead pesantren to find their own identity. Early Pesantren, as historian Taufik Abdullah (Pesantren in Historical Perspective) have said, became “world-shapers” and rural realities, especially in Java, a conclusion that Gus Dur also put forward (The Revival of Islamic Civilization: Is There Him?). With its ability to fuse the solid bureaucratic desire in the Western education system into a familial atmosphere, between Kiai and santri; and not focus on accumulating knowledge and sharpening the brain, but also attaching importance to the formation of human personality and character.
Pesantren has succeeded in giving birth to a generation of intellectuals different from the “Surau intellectuals” and “Western intellectuals“. Perhaps the success in shaping personality and character attracted the attention of the movement’s figures because that was what most needed at the time. They are arguing about what kind of society and human character they want in the future.
Its presence as a subculture, as exemplified by Gus Dur’s Tebuireng (Pesantren Profil A Subculture), pesantren has succeeded in upholding a humane life by fighting all acts of violence, discrimination and oppression by thugs and sugar factory rulers. A presence that has undoubtedly received a strong response from the factory and conveys sympathy for the majority of the oppressed people. And since then, Tebuireng said Gus Dur, gradually turned into a village where every aspect of human life and humanity stands tall and everyone’s honour is widely felt.
The vital role of pesantren, which then led the Kiai to occupy a strategic, central, and decisive position, seemed to still be evident until the early 1970s when they intensively researched the role of pesantren. Dhofier (Tradition Pesantren), Horikoshi (Kyai and Social Change), Nurcholish Madjid (Profile of Pesantren), and Manasurnoor (Ulama of Madura) came to the same conclusion, how Kiai and pesantren are central and essential agents of change guard. In their 1978 survey on leadership in Madura, the LP3ES research team reached similar conclusions: 70.20% of respondents chose the pesantren Kiai as the closest, most respected, and most obeyed leader; 16.40% chose non-Kiai and shaman party leaders; and the rest (10.40%) chose a formal leader: a bureaucratic official (Social Leadership in Madura).
One Reply to “Pesantren and Indonesia’s National Movement”